Just woke up turn TV on to hear yet another nut case with a gun.

A massive rise in 2016 which has also continued into this year. The response? New laws to restrict the sale of acid to U18s. Will it stop all acid attacks? No. Will it reduce them significantly? Time will tell but I suspect it will do.

The key point here is that the government is empowered to respond. There is no lobby working to prevent legislative change. I am sure that the same action would be taken if this was a problem in the States. Except it isn't because people can shoot each other instead and not even the POTUS can drive change when it comes to guns.

Anyone know what a ghost gun is? or how easy it is to get one? Or how often they are used in crime in America? Shit, Obama and his buddies gave the worst criminals thousands of military firearms in bungled Operation Fast and Furious.

Do you think Stephen Craig Paddock would have respected and abided by laws? or would he have worked around them? This wasn't a momentary crime of passion, its something he's been planning for a long time. He would have got the guns either way or tried something else (bomb, truck, etc). He is an evil person who disregarded and abused the LAW. he had explosives too! Did he just go down to the explosive store and pick those up? No, he had to figure out how. Politicizing him as the poster child for centralizing gun ownership only to the government is not good.

I'll give you a good example. I think this bump stock thing should probably be illegal, if they do pass a law, you will still be able to get one, as long as you have customers, you have buyers. Someone will be selling whatever you need or want. If you are a criminal buyer their are criminal sellers waiting for your business.

As always I think its fine to review gun control laws that make sense and change things for the better, using a mass shootings just create a knee-jerk, emotional political grandstand that just pits one side against another, like the NFL nonsense, its the wrong place and time.

Stephen Paddock broke the law, one more law, would not have changed anything

The violent deaths of 59 people instantly becomes a plaything for conspiracy nuts. Utterly insane!

Your reaction and response typifies those who think "normally" and cannot believe that corruption exists within government. Corruption which is brutally psychopathic.

Unfortunately, and very sadly, those who control the governments of the West, and particularly the governments of the United States of America, are truly depraved psychopaths who will stop at nothing to achieve their lust for power and control.

I too, in my idealistic youth, had similar thoughts to yours. My Naval Service brought me into contact with Black Projects Operatives and other Intelligence Types who introduced me to Reality. The reality that America and The West are under the control of some very wicked people. Think JW pedophile policy magnified by thousands. Child Sacrifice and Blood Ritual in secret locations.

During the Apocalypse (The Revealing) this will be brought to the light of day. It has already begun.

In thinking about what is on this thread, it seems to me that many people are calling for laws that are already exist in many places, if not everywhere. Ownership and transfer of fully automatic weapons is heavily regulated. Modifying a weapon to fire fully automatic is illegal. Selling guns across state lines is illegal. Background checks and safe storage laws are becoming more common.

I will suggest that what many of you need to do is either petition your state legislatures to pass laws like background checks that your state may not have, or severely beat your politicians to enforce the laws they have (Illinois/Chicago I'm looking at you). I know, somebody's going to say it needs to be done at the federal level, and they won't do it. Well, that's what we have state governments for.

I think the problem with the gun debate is people seem unable to think holistically.

Should you be able to have a rifle? Probably, in a country where people hunt etc...

Should you be able to have an assault-style weapon? Maybe, but with some controls

Should you be able to have 100 of them and a stockpile of ammunition? Ok, crazy-town.

Same with handguns - should you be able to have one? Probably. Should you be able to have 20 with high-capacity clips? Probably less justification.

The point where someone is stockpiling weapons and especially the types of weapons should be the point something kicks in and at some point the answer becomes "no, you don't have the right to more".

The simple answer to all these issues is to enforce licensing and insurance. No one is saying you can't have a gun, the issue becomes the insurance cost for you to have it and whether you still want to have 100 when it will cost you a fortune.

And the money collected from the insurance goes to victims of crimes.

As freemindfade pointed out too - the crocodile tears by any politician caught supplying guns to criminal gangs are pathetic. Obama was an actor, probably why the hollywood types love him, but he is a cynical hypocrite when it came to policy and action. Did he make anything better? No.